Yes that looks good, at first. However many knowledgeable people still have grave concerns when it comes to the issue.
"For example, in the nuclear power industry, estimates of human error (as a percentage of system failures) range from twenty to sixty-five percent [Moray88]. Within a particular type of system, operating powerplants, 15 to 30% of reported events occurring during operation involved a human error component [Griffon-Fouco87]. Of these events:
approximately 80% occur during operation and periodic tests about 50% occur in the control room almost 40% of these errors are evidenced by inappropriate user actions [Griffon-Fouco87].
Related studies [Meclot & Griffon-Fouco88] have indicated a number of deep causes of these human failures. Although sixty-two percent of the significant incidents can be attributed to the ergonomics of the workplace and the organization of the work, another fifty-six percent can be attributed to failure to follow procedures (26%), content of procedures (16%), task complexity (11%) and the form of the procedures (3%)."
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/17.33.html
As well, I've worked in the SCADA (System Control And Data Aquisition)industry and despite massive efforts by sincere and committed programmers and engineers, there are still issues concerning software problems.
Nobody wants problems but they happen. The best way to ensure there's no nuclear fallout is simply don't build them above ground. Why they don't bury these things far under the water table is beyond me.
Yes, yes, yes... I don't care if it's good, bad or ugly. He's a god and I look forward to reading anything he's written.
IMHO, The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress" is the ultimate Sci-Fi novel and he singlehandedly raised the bar so that Science Fiction wasn't simply regarded as pulp. Many people were inspired by his words and foresight. He contributed many revolutionary concepts and provided so many hours of entertainment that even the thought of anything new is interesting in the extreme.
... mostly anyways. It's obvious that American justice is for sale to the highest bidder. If this is such a free society, why is justice only available for a fee? Let's face it, the affluent have sold this country down the river.
On the point of stuff no one wants, perhaps it might be because it's simply not that good. If the music was exceptional, than word would spread and the band could develop a fan base without relying on a record label.
I believe some band will make it big this way someday and from that point other bands and artists in general will move towards p2p distribution.
I couldn't agree more. It's obvious it's the employeers taking the advantage. Look at the gains they accrue. They simply wouldn't have more if they didn't take more.
Any manager who believes thay can make / force / control a worker's actions directly is mistaken and, by definition, ineffective.
Let's use the situation at hand. Said boss of large business gets audited, then makes changes and talks about workers not surfing. He makes the extraordinary income despite the fact he failed to forsee this or plan for it's possibility. By allowing this, the entire company was distracted. If one expects the workers to work perfectly, one should at least be able to demonstrate that it is possible to be that dedicated. When managers make mistakes, rarely are they responsible for them personally. Often though, workers must be responsible for every action. This discrimination in compensation and in self determination is why most managers are failures as leaders. To excessive reward failure while denying fair compensation is the basic, underlying reason most companies aren't far more successful and most managers are ineffective and therefore overpaid.
In plain language, don't create hostile, sterile, demanding enviroments and then expect to have creative and productive workers.
People will never really ever put much more in than they belive they are receiving. All those who think they've made good money by employing others simply don't realize how much we've all lost by relying on the owner / owned paradigm as opposed to the co-owned one. In fact, we'd all have a lot more stuff and a lot more time if we'd co-operate more as opposed to bitterly competing.
Nice, much better FP than my last time. As for objects, what else is there at that level of the paradigm. If code is not part of one, it should be part of another, no? Strictly on the same level, of course? Of course, I Ain't Much Of A Programmer.
None of this takes in to account "odds". Sure, every toss is fifty fifty but would you bet heads after it came up five or ten times already. Nope, you'd bet tails. Odds are you'd win... so, what happened to fifty fifty.... sheesh.
As for the radioactive decay, sorry, not entirely true. In any significant amount of istopes some will always decay. One particular isotope may wait, but only if the sample were large enough to demonstrate immediate decay.
Furthermore, we simply don't know about determinism as we don't really understand subatomic physics yet. In fact, the deeper we go, the more the problem becomes metaphysical in nature.
/I've heard all the trash talk about Id so many times. Seems to me that everybody just wants to defend the games they choose to play. Personally, I think it's simply great that there are so many games out there. Anyone who doesn't recognize that different games add to and enrich each other and our experiences, is, perhaps, not looking deeply enough into the matter. I would suggest that if people need to defend anything, it's because they don't believe it to be strong enough on it's own, or, perhaps, they aren't as self assured as they'd like to be./
Now, my point is that John Carmack and Id have created many hours of believable experiences for vast numbers of people. Furthermore, even if you've never played an Id game, ???!, the other games you've played owe something to the development of immersive, believable enviroments. The main influence on OpenGL was from Carmack, and the main influence on DirectX was OpenGL, at least as far as I can see.
Anyways, I'm looking forward to Doom 3 as I do to any Id game. Honestly, this isn't vapourware and I don't mind waiting for Id, as far as I'm concerned, they've earned the respect.
Of course, you could indulge in simple style, but too the real techies, who would know that either you're using smaller files, or you paid more and got less to go.
Are you trying to say that UT is a completely different game from Q3 when playing 1v1? UT was built to feel like Quake by design.
Try expressing that opinion in alt.games.ut. Thet'd quickly show you the error of your ways. Sorry, in my opinion, they'r not even close, oh, except that they are both FPS. Funny huh... anyways l8r
... but at the core it's still the same game. It's not like trying to move to something completely different, such as CS or TFC.
Hardly! Dood, they aren't even close.
... but most of the skills that are important for 1v1 are much less important for a teamAgain, this isn't so. Really, team games only add team play to the 1v1 experience. Accuracy, stategy, planning, foresight, attitude, they are all there.
I guess it all comes down to personal preference. I still don't feel the best teams are the ones playing in LAN games, so the best team matches are still happening online.
Or, perhaps, you are so out of synch with the pro FPS world and have entirely missed out on what's happening at the upper levels. Sure, there might be some great and fun games online, but the real money and the real games are, and will be, at LAN tournaments.
There are so many reasons for this, I can't believe you can't see it. Well, no problem, there has to diversity and a fringe to every field.
The main thing is you've obviously found your religion, and it's providing you with all the comforts that beliefs can do. Play on dood.
Well, if Fatal1ty can take three months to learn UT and then win a top tournament against guys who've played it since day one, you must realize that not only must he be skilled but he must have sufficent time to train.
My point is, has been, and remains that 1v1 pro comps are the place to see the best. Sure, Fatal1ty would be an awesome team member, and I've seen serious top level team games, but it's never as intense as it gets when it's one on one.
I guess it's like sex in the sense that a group would never be as intimate as an individual. I believe the best games happen when it gets "personal".
"Violence is always the last resort of the incompetent." ~ I. Asimov
Shallow people like you frighten me more than all the evil (broken) people in the entire world. Killing begets only more killing. Violence simply guarantees more violence. Your beliefs are as brutal as your language, which probably speaks volumes for your methods.
Unfortunately, you don't seem to have the depth necessary in order to appreciate the issues you've involved yourself in. As such, I suspect that this reply will be totally lost on you.
However, it was a perfect example of the awesome power of human stupidity, and for that I thank you.
If Americian's don't understand America, what hope do they have in helping others to?
QuakeCon's in Texas, I've never been able to attend due to this little geographical issue;) I've lived on both coasts (west coast when I was most active online, east coast currently), which means that in either case either costs or time have prevented me from being there
Dood this is the net, they broadcast them last year via GTV just so you don't have to physical go. As well, that's why they demo the games, so they can be enjoyed later, wherever. Really, you should check it out, it's intense.
As for community, you won't see me disagreeing here. Being part of a community is essential to development. We live in a social web whose strands are teachings.
However, community does not imply team game play nor disfranchise single players game styles.
Furthermore, the best of the best ultimately comes down to individuals. The edge can cut, but the tip is sharpest.
Meaning that the teams that play online aren't the same teams that play team LAN tournaments... the teams that play online are not the same teams that are playing in LAN tournaments, therefore you don't see the same skill levels in both places online and LAN team tournaments.
Here, again, I can't agree. All the people I meet at LANs play online. In fact, they are always the people who are online the most. LANs are just an inevitable extension of online gaming, imho.
You mentioned earlier that some of the people that win 1v1 LAN tournaments often play those games 8 hours a day, and you can often find people that play team games online 8 hours a day, but you'll rarely find someone that plays an online team game that much and then even wants to play a 1v1 LAN game (although it happens, I'm sure).
Realistically, how many people can afford the time to spend eights hours or more, five days or more, every week for three months straight, as Fatal1ty recently did before his first UT2K3 comp?
Again, they would be the best people playing in that environment. There may be better FPS players out there, but those players may not be playing 1v1 FPS games, or 1v1 tournaments. I'm making the distinction between the best 1v1 players and the best FPS players, because I believe that not only is it nearly impossible to find the best FPS players, but that some (if not most) of the best FPS players are not playing in the tournaments that the best 1v1 players are winning, and that there may even be better 1v1 players that are simply not playing 1v1
I'll grant you that there may be better undiscovered talent out there, but, frankly I doubt there's much. The top people know who they are. Besides, there's good players who just aren't competitive, sure they play well, but they lack the drive to shine at tough times. Truly, the competitive enviroment sets the stage for maximal effort. Since Besides that, I'm only interested in the action I can see, it matters not if the aren't playing at the big LAN's since I wouldn't get to see anyways.
I'll say it again, if you want to see the best FPS, watch the Q3A 1v1 finals at Quakecon. In my experience and in my opinion, this is the pinnicle of the genre.
Be there or be square.;~)
PS. It seems to me you're talking about clan benefits and mistaking them for team oriented play.
There is a difference between how one manages their time and how ones time is spent. The first refers to planning, tasking, evaluating. The second to the value of the activity taking the time.
In 7 Habits Of Highly Effective People, the author discusses the differences between urgent and important.
My point is simply that the LAN payoffs are nearly non-existant for team-based play, so LAN and online tournaments are nearly mutually exclusive in that arena.
Sorry, exclusive in what sense? Are you saying that individuals who play online team type games don't also play in 1v1 LAN tournaments? Ever?
Finally, I don't see how any of that pertains to were the most skills are found. I believe that the few professionals must be the best or they wouldn't be winning. That seems so obvious to me at least. So, when I want to see the best FPS players, I watch the 1v1 finals.
Personally, I don't see how this has anything to do with your preference for teamplay. I'm just pleased you managed to find something that makes your day. Really, I can only encourage you to do more of that and, perhaps, less of this.:~)
Oh, ABTW, yes, I play CTF, but hey, I do a lot of stuff, and it's all fun... for awhile.
Personally, I'm waiting for Doom3 more than HL2 or UT2K4. But then again, that's no surprise, as I'm partial to the Id engine.
As a dual American / Canadian citizen, no, I'm afraid I can't. I've noticed little or no difference between any individual doctors whether they be north or south of some largely irrelevant political boundary. As to your preference for the current system, well, I can only suppose you spoke out of affluence or ignorance. The overly affluent medical industry clearly and unethically exploits the disadvantaged, elderly and impoverished. Imho, doctors should care about patients, not profits. If they want to get rich, they should have gotten an MBA.
As for socialized medicine, there's nothing left-wing or communistic or socialistic about a cost-shared, equal access, publicly accountable, non profit, basic and open health care system. It would simply be cost effective and humane, nothing more, nothing less.
Beside, north or south of the border, it really doesn't matter, as it's actually a very similar situation. Canadians have issues with heathcare access as well. In fact, they largely stem from the same root cause, greed. Whatever good the medical industry does, is offset by the harm it currently causes. Doctors have so eroded the trust we placed in them that they've created a largely unregulated alternate health mass movement based on pseudoscience, rumor and supposition. Furthermore, natural and useful substances are dismissed simply because they aren't profitable enough. In these ways, millions of Americans and Canadians are denied effective treatment or even factual information. Drug companies routinely influence drug studies, prescription decisions and the market and certainly not for the betterment of all. This is a good thing?
If anyone thinks that every social system should be governed by those who profit from it, then accept that people will always be exploited. Those who would manage with only short term profits in mind are simply ignoring long term cost in order to try to justify an excessive lifestyle they haven't earned. That's hardly an ideal I'd promote. Really, from my perspective, the successful thieves are the ones holding the bags of money. By the way, have you seen the movie, Patch Adams? Tell me, in all honesty, isn't he a the kind of doctor we really should be seeking? Personally, imho, he should be running the whole health show. Not like we'd ever have the courage and conviction to see that through. Am I the only one who sees the imminent decline and fall of the American empire? To me it seems we allowed the wealthy to totally corrupt the system to the point of no return, and, as to personal sacrifice, no, I won't post this anonymously.
Yah, I have close friends who feel exactly the same, and I'm not saying the Quake engine is the "best", whatever that may be. Simply, that, for better or worse, it is the defacto standard. Id has more influence in the FPS arena than any other sole influence, at least to date. There are other engines that have many supporters and I, for one, would be the last person to suggest that they were wrong. Nor am I advocating that people play Id games or Quake. I'm simply saying Quake had such significance that it's introduction has become a milestone. But, as you say, that was only the beginning. Besides, I'd accept cartoonish graphics if it means superior gameplay.
Mom told me real gamers pack heavy metal.:) So I bought a comp and it's never been sane around here since...
I'm just going to say it one more time, because obviously you don't care to listen anyway.
Don't have a cow man. I care enough to try to show you the error of your ways.;~) Seriously, I know that to you, the team thing is the thing and I'm sure there are elite skilled players who play on teams, who feel the same way. In fact, I'm willing to bet that most professional FPS gamers also play as part of a clan or team and, perhaps, even enjoy it more. I'm not for a minute discounting the value of teamwork or team skills, as those are impressive and important. As well, I do care, otherwise I wouldn't have spent my time conversing.
Eventually the 1v1 stuff is going to die out in tournaments just like it has been online.
Hardly, I see no evidence that 1v1 is any less popular than it ever has been. If you can point to some evidence that shows 1v1 is declining in popularity, then I'll consider looking at it that way.
The best online teams are not located in the same area for the simple reason that the best teams will seek the best players, regardless of where they are (Counterstrike actually focuses more on location, though, even when they're playing online), and because in online leagues you have to diversify locations to prevent a single router problem from bringing down the whole team (for example one round of a match could cause everyone in a specific area to have pings in excess of 400).
Actually, I suspect that physical location is not as unimportant to teams as you consider. I'd bet that many teams balance skills and locale. After all, what good are skills if attendance and network performance are issues? Besides, there are enough good gamers that you needn't necessarily recruit far away people. Most teams seem fairly regional to me. Europeans, Americans, etc... as more people game, I expect we will see city teams. My point is that physical LAN's will be more common and then I expect to see equal interest in personal and team FPS. Perhaps it won't be equal, after all, who really knows?
However, at the moment, it doesn't seem so to me. I remember watching the CPL Quake finals and thinking, "this is it." I have never seen better games, nor more intensity. These guys were fighting for thier "lives" and it showed,... big time. Anyways, that's just what I experienced, I guess YMMV. (shrug)
Once tournaments are willing to shell out the money to make it worthwhile for a team to play, they will come, just as the 1v1 players already do (for more money than the tournaments usually offer to a full team at the moment).
Yes, someday... but not today. Today, the real cash is at the LAN's and not online. Online tournaments are were you sharpen your skills and practice for the "payoffs". Or so it seems to me.
I agree with your views regarding cheating causing a lot of issues with whether or not people can really be considered the best from their play online, but the simple fact is that it's what we've had to deal with for a very long time, and until the tournaments adapt, the best teams will remain online.
Isn't it a touch shallow to assume that LAN's and online tournaments are mutually exclusive. The players I hang with will playing in anything, especially when there's winnings. Like I said before, teamplay is great, but 1v1 is currently where the buck stops. Anyways, I'd rather be fraggin...
Slashdot Mirror
Yes that looks good, at first. However many knowledgeable people still have grave concerns when it comes to the issue.
"For example, in the nuclear power industry, estimates of human error (as a percentage of system failures) range from twenty to sixty-five percent [Moray88]. Within a particular type of system, operating powerplants, 15 to 30% of reported events occurring during operation involved a human error component [Griffon-Fouco87]. Of these events:
approximately 80% occur during operation and periodic tests
about 50% occur in the control room
almost 40% of these errors are evidenced by inappropriate user actions [Griffon-Fouco87].
Related studies [Meclot & Griffon-Fouco88] have indicated a number of deep causes of these human failures. Although sixty-two percent of the significant incidents can be attributed to the ergonomics of the workplace and the organization of the work, another fifty-six percent can be attributed to failure to follow procedures (26%), content of procedures (16%), task complexity (11%) and the form of the procedures (3%)."
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/17.33.html
As well, I've worked in the SCADA (System Control And Data Aquisition)industry and despite massive efforts by sincere and committed programmers and engineers, there are still issues concerning software problems.
Nobody wants problems but they happen. The best way to ensure there's no nuclear fallout is simply don't build them above ground. Why they don't bury these things far under the water table is beyond me.
Yes, yes, yes ... I don't care if it's good, bad or ugly. He's a god and I look forward to reading anything he's written.
IMHO, The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress" is the ultimate Sci-Fi novel and he singlehandedly raised the bar so that Science Fiction wasn't simply regarded as pulp. Many people were inspired by his words and foresight. He contributed many revolutionary concepts and provided so many hours of entertainment that even the thought of anything new is interesting in the extreme.
... mostly anyways. It's obvious that American justice is for sale to the highest bidder. If this is such a free society, why is justice only available for a fee? Let's face it, the affluent have sold this country down the river.
...
Sadly anonymous by necessity
On the point of stuff no one wants, perhaps it might be because it's simply not that good. If the music was exceptional, than word would spread and the band could develop a fan base without relying on a record label.
I believe some band will make it big this way someday and from that point other bands and artists in general will move towards p2p distribution.
I couldn't agree more. It's obvious it's the employeers taking the advantage. Look at the gains they accrue. They simply wouldn't have more if they didn't take more.
Any manager who believes thay can make / force / control a worker's actions directly is mistaken and, by definition, ineffective.
Let's use the situation at hand. Said boss of large business gets audited, then makes changes and talks about workers not surfing. He makes the extraordinary income despite the fact he failed to forsee this or plan for it's possibility. By allowing this, the entire company was distracted. If one expects the workers to work perfectly, one should at least be able to demonstrate that it is possible to be that dedicated. When managers make mistakes, rarely are they responsible for them personally. Often though, workers must be responsible for every action. This discrimination in compensation and in self determination is why most managers are failures as leaders. To excessive reward failure while denying fair compensation is the basic, underlying reason most companies aren't far more successful and most managers are ineffective and therefore overpaid.
In plain language, don't create hostile, sterile, demanding enviroments and then expect to have creative and productive workers.
People will never really ever put much more in than they belive they are receiving. All those who think they've made good money by employing others simply don't realize how much we've all lost by relying on the owner / owned paradigm as opposed to the co-owned one. In fact, we'd all have a lot more stuff and a lot more time if we'd co-operate more as opposed to bitterly competing.
Sorry, I wasn't really trolling and I'm not really a subscriber either, however, I'm wondering where the heck everybody is?
;-)
By the way, takes one to know one?
Nice, much better FP than my last time. As for objects, what else is there at that level of the paradigm. If code is not part of one, it should be part of another, no? Strictly on the same level, of course? Of course, I Ain't Much Of A Programmer.
I'll believe you when you can show me a macroscopic amount of stable non decaying uranium, ok?
None of this takes in to account "odds". Sure, every toss is fifty fifty but would you bet heads after it came up five or ten times already. Nope, you'd bet tails. Odds are you'd win ... so, what happened to fifty fifty .... sheesh.
As for the radioactive decay, sorry, not entirely true. In any significant amount of istopes some will always decay. One particular isotope may wait, but only if the sample were large enough to demonstrate immediate decay.
Furthermore, we simply don't know about determinism as we don't really understand subatomic physics yet. In fact, the deeper we go, the more the problem becomes metaphysical in nature.
(inho, the jury is out)
/I've heard all the trash talk about Id so many times. Seems to me that everybody just wants to defend the games they choose to play. Personally, I think it's simply great that there are so many games out there. Anyone who doesn't recognize that different games add to and enrich each other and our experiences, is, perhaps, not looking deeply enough into the matter. I would suggest that if people need to defend anything, it's because they don't believe it to be strong enough on it's own, or, perhaps, they aren't as self assured as they'd like to be./
Now, my point is that John Carmack and Id have created many hours of believable experiences for vast numbers of people. Furthermore, even if you've never played an Id game, ???!, the other games you've played owe something to the development of immersive, believable enviroments. The main influence on OpenGL was from Carmack, and the main influence on DirectX was OpenGL, at least as far as I can see.
Anyways, I'm looking forward to Doom 3 as I do to any Id game. Honestly, this isn't vapourware and I don't mind waiting for Id, as far as I'm concerned, they've earned the respect.
so does price.
Of course, you could indulge in simple style,
but too the real techies, who would know
that either you're using smaller files,
or you paid more and got less to go.
and another .... Mars Movies 2
and, try listen to ... Jeff Wayne's War Of The World's". It's a classic.
Are you trying to say that UT is a completely different game from Q3 when playing 1v1? UT was built to feel like Quake by design.
... anyways l8r
Try expressing that opinion in alt.games.ut. Thet'd quickly show you the error of your ways. Sorry, in my opinion, they'r not even close, oh, except that they are both FPS. Funny huh
Hardly! Dood, they aren't even close.
I guess it all comes down to personal preference. I still don't feel the best teams are the ones playing in LAN games, so the best team matches are still happening online.
Or, perhaps, you are so out of synch with the pro FPS world and have entirely missed out on what's happening at the upper levels. Sure, there might be some great and fun games online, but the real money and the real games are, and will be, at LAN tournaments.
There are so many reasons for this, I can't believe you can't see it. Well, no problem, there has to diversity and a fringe to every field.
The main thing is you've obviously found your religion, and it's providing you with all the comforts that beliefs can do. Play on dood.
Peace, out.
Well, if Fatal1ty can take three months to learn UT and then win a top tournament against guys who've played it since day one, you must realize that not only must he be skilled but he must have sufficent time to train.
My point is, has been, and remains that 1v1 pro comps are the place to see the best. Sure, Fatal1ty would be an awesome team member, and I've seen serious top level team games, but it's never as intense as it gets when it's one on one.
I guess it's like sex in the sense that a group would never be as intimate as an individual. I believe the best games happen when it gets "personal".
"Violence is always the last resort of the incompetent." ~ I. Asimov
Shallow people like you frighten me more than all the evil (broken) people in the entire world. Killing begets only more killing. Violence simply guarantees more violence. Your beliefs are as brutal as your language, which probably speaks volumes for your methods.
Unfortunately, you don't seem to have the depth necessary in order to appreciate the issues you've involved yourself in. As such, I suspect that this reply will be totally lost on you.
However, it was a perfect example of the awesome power of human stupidity, and for that I thank you.
If Americian's don't understand America, what hope do they have in helping others to?
Dood this is the net, they broadcast them last year via GTV just so you don't have to physical go. As well, that's why they demo the games, so they can be enjoyed later, wherever. Really, you should check it out, it's intense.
As for community, you won't see me disagreeing here. Being part of a community is essential to development. We live in a social web whose strands are teachings. However, community does not imply team game play nor disfranchise single players game styles. Furthermore, the best of the best ultimately comes down to individuals. The edge can cut, but the tip is sharpest.
Meaning that the teams that play online aren't the same teams that play team LAN tournaments ... the teams that play online are not the same teams that are playing in LAN tournaments, therefore you don't see the same skill levels in both places online and LAN team tournaments.
;~)
Here, again, I can't agree. All the people I meet at LANs play online. In fact, they are always the people who are online the most. LANs are just an inevitable extension of online gaming, imho.
You mentioned earlier that some of the people that win 1v1 LAN tournaments often play those games 8 hours a day, and you can often find people that play team games online 8 hours a day, but you'll rarely find someone that plays an online team game that much and then even wants to play a 1v1 LAN game (although it happens, I'm sure).
Realistically, how many people can afford the time to spend eights hours or more, five days or more, every week for three months straight, as Fatal1ty recently did before his first UT2K3 comp?
Again, they would be the best people playing in that environment. There may be better FPS players out there, but those players may not be playing 1v1 FPS games, or 1v1 tournaments. I'm making the distinction between the best 1v1 players and the best FPS players, because I believe that not only is it nearly impossible to find the best FPS players, but that some (if not most) of the best FPS players are not playing in the tournaments that the best 1v1 players are winning, and that there may even be better 1v1 players that are simply not playing 1v1
I'll grant you that there may be better undiscovered talent out there, but, frankly I doubt there's much. The top people know who they are. Besides, there's good players who just aren't competitive, sure they play well, but they lack the drive to shine at tough times. Truly, the competitive enviroment sets the stage for maximal effort. Since Besides that, I'm only interested in the action I can see, it matters not if the aren't playing at the big LAN's since I wouldn't get to see anyways.
I'll say it again, if you want to see the best FPS, watch the Q3A 1v1 finals at Quakecon. In my experience and in my opinion, this is the pinnicle of the genre.
Be there or be square.
PS. It seems to me you're talking about clan benefits and mistaking them for team oriented play.
There is a difference between how one manages their time and how ones time is spent. The first refers to planning, tasking, evaluating. The second to the value of the activity taking the time.
In 7 Habits Of Highly Effective People, the author discusses the differences between urgent and important.
Anticipation is great, but in this case, too much of a good thing is killing me. ;~)
My point is simply that the LAN payoffs are nearly non-existant for team-based play, so LAN and online tournaments are nearly mutually exclusive in that arena.
:~)
... for awhile.
Sorry, exclusive in what sense? Are you saying that individuals who play online team type games don't also play in 1v1 LAN tournaments? Ever?
Finally, I don't see how any of that pertains to were the most skills are found. I believe that the few professionals must be the best or they wouldn't be winning. That seems so obvious to me at least. So, when I want to see the best FPS players, I watch the 1v1 finals.
Personally, I don't see how this has anything to do with your preference for teamplay. I'm just pleased you managed to find something that makes your day. Really, I can only encourage you to do more of that and, perhaps, less of this.
Oh, ABTW, yes, I play CTF, but hey, I do a lot of stuff, and it's all fun
Personally, I'm waiting for Doom3 more than HL2 or UT2K4. But then again, that's no surprise, as I'm partial to the Id engine.
As a dual American / Canadian citizen, no, I'm afraid I can't. I've noticed little or no difference between any individual doctors whether they be north or south of some largely irrelevant political boundary. As to your preference for the current system, well, I can only suppose you spoke out of affluence or ignorance. The overly affluent medical industry clearly and unethically exploits the disadvantaged, elderly and impoverished. Imho, doctors should care about patients, not profits. If they want to get rich, they should have gotten an MBA.
As for socialized medicine, there's nothing left-wing or communistic or socialistic about a cost-shared, equal access, publicly accountable, non profit, basic and open health care system. It would simply be cost effective and humane, nothing more, nothing less.
Beside, north or south of the border, it really doesn't matter, as it's actually a very similar situation. Canadians have issues with heathcare access as well. In fact, they largely stem from the same root cause, greed. Whatever good the medical industry does, is offset by the harm it currently causes. Doctors have so eroded the trust we placed in them that they've created a largely unregulated alternate health mass movement based on pseudoscience, rumor and supposition. Furthermore, natural and useful substances are dismissed simply because they aren't profitable enough. In these ways, millions of Americans and Canadians are denied effective treatment or even factual information. Drug companies routinely influence drug studies, prescription decisions and the market and certainly not for the betterment of all. This is a good thing?
If anyone thinks that every social system should be governed by those who profit from it, then accept that people will always be exploited. Those who would manage with only short term profits in mind are simply ignoring long term cost in order to try to justify an excessive lifestyle they haven't earned. That's hardly an ideal I'd promote. Really, from my perspective, the successful thieves are the ones holding the bags of money. By the way, have you seen the movie, Patch Adams? Tell me, in all honesty, isn't he a the kind of doctor we really should be seeking? Personally, imho, he should be running the whole health show. Not like we'd ever have the courage and conviction to see that through. Am I the only one who sees the imminent decline and fall of the American empire? To me it seems we allowed the wealthy to totally corrupt the system to the point of no return, and, as to personal sacrifice, no, I won't post this anonymously.
Yah, I have close friends who feel exactly the same, and I'm not saying the Quake engine is the "best", whatever that may be. Simply, that, for better or worse, it is the defacto standard. Id has more influence in the FPS arena than any other sole influence, at least to date. There are other engines that have many supporters and I, for one, would be the last person to suggest that they were wrong. Nor am I advocating that people play Id games or Quake. I'm simply saying Quake had such significance that it's introduction has become a milestone. But, as you say, that was only the beginning. Besides, I'd accept cartoonish graphics if it means superior gameplay.
:) So I bought a comp and it's never been sane around here since ...
Mom told me real gamers pack heavy metal.
I'm just going to say it one more time, because obviously you don't care to listen anyway.
;~) Seriously, I know that to you, the team thing is the thing and I'm sure there are elite skilled players who play on teams, who feel the same way. In fact, I'm willing to bet that most professional FPS gamers also play as part of a clan or team and, perhaps, even enjoy it more. I'm not for a minute discounting the value of teamwork or team skills, as those are impressive and important. As well, I do care, otherwise I wouldn't have spent my time conversing.
... as more people game, I expect we will see city teams. My point is that physical LAN's will be more common and then I expect to see equal interest in personal and team FPS. Perhaps it won't be equal, after all, who really knows?
... big time. Anyways, that's just what I experienced, I guess YMMV. (shrug)
... but not today. Today, the real cash is at the LAN's and not online. Online tournaments are were you sharpen your skills and practice for the "payoffs". Or so it seems to me.
...
Don't have a cow man. I care enough to try to show you the error of your ways.
Eventually the 1v1 stuff is going to die out in tournaments just like it has been online.
Hardly, I see no evidence that 1v1 is any less popular than it ever has been. If you can point to some evidence that shows 1v1 is declining in popularity, then I'll consider looking at it that way.
The best online teams are not located in the same area for the simple reason that the best teams will seek the best players, regardless of where they are (Counterstrike actually focuses more on location, though, even when they're playing online), and because in online leagues you have to diversify locations to prevent a single router problem from bringing down the whole team (for example one round of a match could cause everyone in a specific area to have pings in excess of 400).
Actually, I suspect that physical location is not as unimportant to teams as you consider. I'd bet that many teams balance skills and locale. After all, what good are skills if attendance and network performance are issues? Besides, there are enough good gamers that you needn't necessarily recruit far away people. Most teams seem fairly regional to me. Europeans, Americans, etc
However, at the moment, it doesn't seem so to me. I remember watching the CPL Quake finals and thinking, "this is it." I have never seen better games, nor more intensity. These guys were fighting for thier "lives" and it showed,
Once tournaments are willing to shell out the money to make it worthwhile for a team to play, they will come, just as the 1v1 players already do (for more money than the tournaments usually offer to a full team at the moment).
Yes, someday
I agree with your views regarding cheating causing a lot of issues with whether or not people can really be considered the best from their play online, but the simple fact is that it's what we've had to deal with for a very long time, and until the tournaments adapt, the best teams will remain online.
Isn't it a touch shallow to assume that LAN's and online tournaments are mutually exclusive. The players I hang with will playing in anything, especially when there's winnings. Like I said before, teamplay is great, but 1v1 is currently where the buck stops. Anyways, I'd rather be fraggin
Isn't perspective grand. BTW, no thanks, I avoid sweet nothings if at all possible.
Odd, however, since I seem to feel exactly the same.
Have a nice day yourself.